You’ve probably heard of yellowcake: How about uranium hexafluoride? Does calling someone a “Bush hater” strike you as a valid counter to that question? Never mind this story goes straight to the top with who’s in the White House right now — on very specific culpability to boot. How so?
How I’d love to live in a world where you’d ask not out of party-line pursuits — but because it’s on the trail to the truth.
Why I do need to remind Sowell’s acolytes that assuming bad motives is in gross breach of the very principles upon which he’s put on a pedestal? Not to mention how his disciples defend the indefensible by issuing rapid-fire ridicule for satisfaction in full. Sowell’s a well-mannered guy and these people act like animals to honor him.
I’m Not Out to “DESTROY” Sowell Quite the contrary! Stick around — you’ll see. That his followers instantly assume bad motives (issuing rapid-fire ridicule for satisfaction in full): Is in gross breach of the standards he espouses. You’ve been playing that hate-card crap for decades — and I’m keenly aware that the Left plays the same games.
I’ll get to them later, but in the meantime:
They’re not flooding the internet on a daily basis with quotes like this:
In light of that — how do you explain this:
On evidence involving artillery rockets and material properties of centrifuge rotors — the apostles of Sowell smugly cite his books on economics, race, and whatnot: Anything to glorify him as they abandon any notion of accountability:
Butchering his bedrock beliefs as they dance in delight behind their force field of fallacy.
These people do nothing but question my motives, mock my site, and assault my character — then proudly post quotes of Sowell looking stately as he condemns the very thing they’re doing.
- Repeat slogans: “Everybody believed Iraq had WMD”
- Question people’s motives: Bush hater, Bush basher, Bush Derangement Syndrome, Plamegate & plenty more. Adding to the arsenal of childish crap to continue the tradition: Snowflake, Libtard, Libturd, Cupcake, TDS, Demon-crat, Democrat Party
- Bold assertions: Russians said so, British said so, Bill Clinton said so, Leaders of both parties said so . . .
No coherent argument, Repeat slogans, Vent their emotions, Question people’s motives, Bold assertions . . .
Following Facts Where They Lead
“Said so and so”? . . . that’s one helluva trip you took there, Mr. Sowell.
Stirring Defense!
Are you telling me . . .
That I can grasp this — but you can’t grasp that?
As in — not this . . .
I tend to believe Thomas Sowell. He is brilliant and has worked at a think tank for about 40 years. Sources matter! Yours is from a concerned citizen.
This concerned citizen interviewed a world-renowned nuclear scientist, corresponded with the key physicist who wrote extensively on the tubes, along with correspondence with Colin Powell’s chief of intelligence at the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR):
Powell’s very own intelligence agency that he conveniently ignored. INR stuck to its old-fashioned ways by agreeing with DOE:
Ya know, the actual experts!
Speaking of “Bush hater” lingo and the like. How it is possible that someone of Sowell’s caliber could miss his camp’s lockstep belligerence in their March of Folly for freedom in the aftermath of 9/11? In his 2007 piece Anger of the Left — he acts like the Right’s record vanished off the face of the earth. Back to that in a bit.
But in what parallel universe does a record riddled with partisan hackery qualify as a “nonconformist”?
About those think tanks . . .
What’s Wrong With This Picture?
And this one . . .
Associated Press, October 3rd, 2004: Rice said she learned of objections by the Energy Department only after making her 2002 comments.
Richard W. Memmer: Are we to believe that the National Security Advisor of the United States was unaware of an intelligence dispute of this magnitude that had been going on for well over a year?
One Congressional investigator went so far as to call it a holy war. And doesn’t it strike you as suspicious that she didn’t bother consulting the DOE before serving up images of a nuclear detonation?
— Act II
Holy War
That sounds worthy of consideration — don’t ya think?
Not to Sowell’s crowd . . .
And their kin who came before them:
It is as though with some people — those who most avidly embrace the “we are right” view — have minds that are closed from the very get-go, and they are entirely incapable of opening them, even just a crack.
There is no curiosity in them. There are no questions in their minds. There are no “what ifs?” or “maybes.”
— Laura Knight-Jadczyk
You think this guy putting on a play would risk his precious following in the face of facts that fly in the face of the script? For someone who spent “3 months of deep immersion into the life and ideas of Dr. Sowell” — shouldn’t he know that rethinking your assumptions is central to Sowell’s standards? As Dr. Henderson wrote in heaping praise upon Sowell, “the role of knowledge and information in decisions” is of paramount importance in the eyes of their “National Treasure.”
As I spotted Sowell’s patterns of hypocrisy in a matter of minutes, I have to wonder what Clifton Duncan was doing during “3 months of deep immersion.” What he missed then is one thing — what he’s willing to miss now is something else entirely. It would never occur to this actor that he’d have a play for the ages by acting on the very principles upon which he puts Sowell on a pedestal.
Imagine coming across undeniable evidence that knocks him off his high horse. But instead of avoiding reality like Black Death — Duncan embraced the discovery to take his story the new heights. An in so doing, the ultimate irony is that he would “Become [the spirit of] Thomas Sowell” for real, as the image he believes in is an illusion.
Not the tiniest trace of reasoning can be found in anything I’ve come across in decades of dealing with the doubt-free on WMD. And of all those I’ve challenged — their knowledge combined could fit into a thimble with space to spare.
Funny how there’s always an excuse . . .
Back in the day — there was no website with an array of illustrations to gripe about. I was just sharing Trillion Dollar Tube to all these fine folks flaunting their badge of beliefs so F.A.I.R. In that clip, there’s no correlating of multiple contexts to tell a larger story. No long story to take up your time. Just 5 minutes of your life to look at argument that obliterates the bullshit that took us to war. But without watching one second of my work:
I’d suggest heading on back to that backwater school, Purdue, for a little more indoctrination, er, I mean education.
“BACKWATER SCHOOL“
To call the Cradle of Astronauts “backwater” is award-worthy for asinine statements.
The “arguments” of “Expert” By Association — taking cue from his kin on Rolodex of Ridicule:
- “You use words like honor, courage and commitment as punch lines at liberal cocktail parties” — ripping off A Few Good Men and thinking I wouldn’t notice
- The “Get help!” routine
- “Academia”
- “I’ve stood on the wall — have you?” — Jesus, why not toss in “You weep for Santiago” while you’re at it?
What does any of THAT have to do with the price of tea in China — or THIS?
Once you quit hearing ‘sir’ and ‘ma’am’ — the rest is soon to foller
— No Country for Old Men
Ah yes, the “promote your little video” ploy:
The “Promotional” Program
Every single thing we share on social media is promoting something (even if it’s cupcakes you just baked). Nothing wrong with promoting a little goodness — whether it’s right out of the oven or white-hot truth.
And steel is strong because it knew the hammer and white heat
About those NAVY Core Values
That “Expert” By Association holds so dear:
I put it all on a silver platter for you 10 years ago:
When I Saw the Writing on the Wall
Or Not . . .
Snowflake, Libtard, Libturd, Cupcake, Bush hater, Bush basher, Bush Derangement Syndrome, TDS, Demon-crat, Democrat Party
Stirring Defense!
Anything Goes for apologists trying to preserve what they perceive. I know their Rolodex of Ridicule rabbit-hole routine — all too well. And now for the weather . . .
If I came across someone so clearly in command of this material — I wouldn’t give a f#@k about format. They could write it down on napkins and I’d roll with it. I don’t need somebody to babysit me with the just the right formula for me to carefully consider something. I’m happy to put some time and effort into working it out on my own.
In reference to its opening image on Without Passion or Prejudice, I wrote: “Half the country is with me on this — and I just lost the other half. Had I started with the image below — it would be the opposite half.” When you make up your mind on lickety-split perception alone:
In what world does that qualify as critical thinking? Ann Baker’s article beautifully captures what critical thinking is and is not:
Indeed, nowadays, we tend to take in and repeat whatever the values and beliefs of those around us have rather than forming our own independent thought and stopping to organize and evaluate the information we are receiving.
Which means a critical thinker would take the following information into account. Even if you don’t read ’em right now — you’d at least pause long enough to see that my scrutiny spares no side.
Taking on the entire country by myself is worlds away from what everyone else is doing. Explaining America’s decline from decades of dishonesty and systematic self-delusion in the Gutter Games of Government: Is apples & oranges as it gets when compared to the transactional nature of news and social-media norms.
And Tolstoy’s quote below . . .
Captures why they refuse to see for the same reason you do:
It’s a mighty fine day when you wake up to high praise from a man of Glenn Loury’s caliber — twice! He once called my writing “brilliant,” was “honored by it,” and “blown away” by my site and signed up.
I’d like to think that’d at least give me a little credibility with his supporters.
I’d like to think a lot of things.
There was a time when newfangled ways of “argument” wasn’t all the rage — where you furiously fire off some fashionable form of “You’re wrong!” and dish it all day long: Insisting upon “affirmation independent of all findings” (borrowing from Peck who borrowed from Buber).
I don’t roll that way. You’re wrong — and here’s why! That’s the discipline — to have a work ethic in the way you think. Without “here’s why,” you’re just whistlin’ Dixie.
Case in point:
I KNOW . . .
That you know the answer to this question:
Without [the tubes], they had nothing.
And nothing on the tubes (or anything else of substance on this endless saga of absurdity): Is what you’ll find in Thomas Sowell’s articles on Iraq WMD. His fanatical followers are so bothered by how much I have to say: That nowhere in their minds does it dawn on them to wonder why he said so little.
At every turn . . .
The faithful tap dance around reality — oily evading anything that requires them to hold Sowell to his own standards.
Hard to Imagine:
That I have to explain that quote to people who seemingly live to flood the internet with his words.
He and his flock incessantly complain about the media — and they don’t make policy. But the second I scrutinize Sowell — suddenly you have new standards.
180 — how fitting!
Not only did Sowell flagrantly fail to follow the facts on all-things Iraq — he brazenly ignored the debauchery in his own party to politely pounce on the other. And yet somehow his patently obvious history of hypocrisy has gone unnoticed for decades by people heaping praise upon him.
There’s a thing about Sowell that isn’t often mentioned . . . he can step completely outside of the race thing and just express himself about just stuff — which is not the usual.
And I find it interesting that with Sowell — one reason some people today would find it hard to go with him is that he doesn’t write with that tribalist sense.
Weapons of Crass Obstruction
Sowell has a habit of headlines oozing in partisan pettiness. On two of the biggest events in history — Sowell seems pretty tribal to me:
He’s trying to be purely objective and there’s nothing in him of — here’s what we down here think. Here’s what we’ve been through.
Desperate and Ugly in Florida
Weapons of Political Destruction
It’s not seasoned with any of that — he’s just trying to have a white lab coat on and look at the facts.
— John McWhorter
If his Crap is King claims on WMD isn’t “seasoned” to you, Mr. McWhorter:
What is?
Hard to Imagine
And Damn Disappointing to Boot
It’s bad enough I gotta deal with unyielding yahoos who yearn to praise Sowell as if it’s a daily duty to broadcast his brilliance — while butchering his principles in practice: But to see people I respected fall into the same trap — enabling their “National Treasure” and the echo chamber around him:
Good grief!
The crude, dirty “brutes” of the land of the Houyhnhnms in Gulliver’s Travels, by Jonathan Swift. The Yahoos are irrational people and represent the worst side of humanity. By contrast, the wise and gentle Houyhnhnms, their masters, are rational horses and represent humanity at its best.
The likes of Loury & McWhorter see themselves as Houyhnhnms — as if they’re immune to irrational behavior in defense of their interests.
“It would be nice” . . .
If you and your crowd would DO what you SAY you do! “It would be nice” if you challenged your audience instead of catering to their cravings. And 3-1/2 years ago: It would have been nice had you listened to what I was saying instead of whining about the way I was saying it.
What wonders he could have worked with what I have in mind. While you should not need an incentive to do what’s right and abide by your own standards: Whatever you’re making on that book . . .
Would be pennies on the dollar had he heard me out on my idea and ran with it.
Loury’s follower replied, “Know your opponent’s argument as well as your own.” What does it mean to say that and then flagrantly ignore facts that fly in the face of your calcified convictions? It’s meaningless — just as Glenn’s desire to “live in a world where facts determined our shared view of reality”: Then instantly ignore the ones you don’t like while incessantly lecturing those who do the same. “If you want to rebut an argument you disagree with, you have to understand it first.” Hmm . . .
I have no idea what you’re talking about . . .
Even in the most unsophisticated years of my youth, I would have never bought something so impossibly simplistic as Sowell’s “said so and so” — and the Right’s ubiquitous belief that “everybody believed Iraq had WMD.”
My mind would never allow me to accept something so easily (thank God).
I don’t know how people find the path of least resistance so satisfying — as I love the demands of difficulty and discernment. To not step up my game in the midst of opportunity or challenge — would be tantamount to treason upon my very existence.
Sowell’s disciples have no interest in such a demanding way of life — as defending the faith is all that matters in the religious-like following around Sowell. They spread the gospel by mindlessly countering with boilerplate beliefs that have no bearing on the issues in question. And the self-righteous from the past pave the way for a future of followers in their footsteps:
In lockstep with a never-ending March of Folly : A parade of principles where preaching magically equates to practice.
Showing Sowell’s piece that follows has nothing to do with defending the Left. This is about his record being wildly out of sync with reality on the Right. I didn’t write Mentality of a Mob from my imagination.
This — is Conformity 101:
Ice-cold partisan hackery wrapped in the warmth of a “white lab coat” . . .
I didn’t write this poem from my imagination either.
I wrote it 3 years before Sowell’s piece — and for decades, this behavior is all I’ve seen from Republicans on Iraq and a helluva lot more.
It’s not anti-war — it’s pro-thinking!
The self-importance of people like Sowell just kills me — how they sit there acting like they’re Senators from Krypton. That’s not knocking appearance just for kicks — as the look and the language is all part of . . .
The Presentation
Sowell’s celebrated as a statesman for smugness under the guise of civility.
He has a habit of painting the Left in the worst possible light — while acting as though “hostility and even hatred” are completely uncharacteristic of conservatives. It’s all about framing the issue in a way that allows him to conveniently ignore the same behavior in other forms.
How often have you seen conservatives or libertarians take to the streets, shouting angry slogans?
I’ve been met with almost nothing but belligerence and belittlement for decades on WMD — but because I wasn’t shouted down in the streets, it doesn’t count?
And this gem . . .
It is hard to think of a time when Karl Rove or Dick Cheney has even raised his voice but they are hated like the devil incarnate
So you can manipulate the nation into war — make up more lies to rationalize those lies, pit half the nation against the other in a post 9/11 world, and on and on: But as long as liars you like don’t raise their voice — there’s no call to be angry about it?
That people on the political left have a certain set of opinions, just as people do in other parts of the ideological spectrum, is not surprising. What is surprising, however, is how often the opinions of those on the left are accompanied by hostility and even hatred.
Particular issues can arouse passions here and there for anyone with any political views. But, for many on the left, indignation is not a sometime thing. It is a way of life.
“What is surprising, however” . . .
Is that your crowd treating me with nothing but contempt for the truth for 20 years — slinging baseless beliefs with “hostility and even hatred”: Doesn’t constitute a “way of life” to you, Mr. Sowell. It’s painfully obvious what this guy’s up to.
He’s engineering an illusion — and you bought it.
A Conflict of Visions . . .
And then some!
Half the country took the word of professional know-it-alls over nuclear scientists. And when your camp came up empty on WMD — you just bought more bullshit from the same people who sold you the first batch:
Shrewd!
Preach responsibility and take none
The Left institutionalizes weakness — and the Democratic Party is notorious for lacking backbone. You weaken the very people you’re trying to strengthen — branding weakness to boot.
And right on cue, the Right is ready to pounce.
I don’t blame ’em — except for the part about them being weak while branding strength.
Conservatives have put on a masterclass of complaining for 30 years — but because the intelligentsia on the Left perennially pumps candy into that piñata: They beat the hell out of you — while unconscionably ignoring the debauchery of their own behavior.
Sailing away on Scot-Free . . .
Then there’s this . . .
America obsessively concerns itself with symbols — fixating over a missing flag pin on a politician’s lapel, for instance.
So — these people can:
- Incessantly lie
- Manipulate the hell out of you
- Start dumb wars and never finish them
- Drag their feet forever
- Obstruct as if not doing your job were a virtue
- Take off all kinds of time after accomplishing nothing
- Waste mountains of money while touting concerns about spending
- Spend enormous amounts of time & energy assailing the opposition while absolving their own at every turn
- Broadcast beliefs that have no bearing on their record or yours
- Rile you up with red meat to savagely scorn the other side — as you sail Scot-Free on an ocean of bottomless lies and hypocrisy . . .
Never in doubt — while you fret over flair:
Conservatives control the narrative about responsibility and think that magically translates to taking responsibility. Republicans pounce on the Left day in and day out — as if the Right’s record vanished off the face of the earth. It’s all about framing the narrative — and the Left institutionalizing weakness is a gimme for the Right to rail on ’em.
That the Left brings it on themselves is another matter . . .
And the icing on the cake:
Somewhat sincere intellectuals justifiably calling out universities, woke ways, racially rigged incidents and such: Providing endless fodder for the Right to rip people for behavior that pales in comparison to what they’ve done for decades.
From my email to Loury, McWhorter, Pinker & others on July 11, 2021:
I obliterated the basis of Maverick — and all of you have a vested interest in denying reality to preserve a belief that is glaringly false. Riley flagrantly ignored the totality of Thomas Sowell’s record to manufacture a “maverick.” On the biggest and most costly lie in modern history — any objective observer can see it’s not true.
Not a trace of his “follow the facts” claim to fame can be found on the most world-altering topic of our time. It doesn’t get any more obvious and definitive—and yet his record is chock-full of party-line hackery on that issue.
Which flies in the face of what Mr. McWhorter said below.
You guys spend your lives telling others that you’re right and they’re wrong. It’s time for you to step up and admit when you’re wrong. If you don’t, what makes you any different from the minds you’re trying to change? To believe he’s a “great man” and “fearless” “maverick” with what you knew of him—is one thing. To continue to believe it in the face of overwhelming and irrefutable evidence — is pure fantasy.
On an email with an opening like that — how on earth can someone of Glenn’s caliber fire back with “I have no idea what you’re talking about”? And what confounds me to no end — is that even if you didn’t know, how could you not want to?
Interconnected echo chambers are seemingly competing for fawning over a professional know-it-all they’d put on Mount Rushmore if they could. This crowd thinks they’re part of some revolution in reason by ceaselessly Tweeting the tenets of Thomas Sowell.
Never mind they instantly abandon them the second he’s under scrutiny.
Anyone worthy of this ridiculous hero-worship — wouldn’t want it, as they’d have a helluva lot higher expectations of their supporters. The cult-like following of this fraud is unlike anything I’ve ever seen. As I’ve been in the trenches battling hermetically sealed minds for decades, that’s saying something.
His disciples see him as some kind of saint-like Sherlock Holmes. And that — is an opportunity!